If you use Google Chrome in your business, keeping track of your users' settings just got a little easier: Google announced a new admin panel for Google Apps for Business and Education customers that will allow administrators to manage Chrome settings, installed applications and extensions, and other browser behaviors on a wide scale. The available controls are very similar to what already exists for managing Chrome OS—we took a look at those features last year.

Using the new control requires your users to be signed into Chrome on their computers. Non-Google Apps customers should still be able to manage Chrome using Google's list of Active Directory-compatible group policies. Both the admin panel and these group policies put Chrome far ahead of other third-party browsers when it comes to enterprise-friendliness. Internet Explorer can be controlled using group policies, but neither Firefox nor Opera expend many resources focusing specifically on businesses.

Google has also released a new extension to help with legacy sites that require an older browser. The new "legacy browser support" extension can open certain links in Internet Explorer for sites that require ActiveX controls and other IE-only features. Administrators can whitelist sites and install the extension via Active Directory; it won't do anything if your Chrome installation isn't being managed via group policy.

Chrome's new features compete with other software that aims to solve browser compatibility issues for businesses tied to older Internet Explorer versions. The Admin panel and the legacy browser support extension both offer many of the same features as something like Browsium's Catalyst, though Catalyst supports Firefox in addition to Chrome and IE.

Google's apparent willingness to support depreciated content worries me greatly. I'm left wondering whether this was a marketing ploy to make IE-depended businesses switch over to better-maintained software. And if so, isn't this going against Google's de facto policy of progressive drive? Allowing for browser-specific legacy code feels like a step back from the future and down towards stagnation.

On one hand, this scenario would not be a bad thing for the immediate pursuit of convenience. On the other, I'm left wary of the broad picture. Please don't hurt the web.

This appeals to me. I've given up on waiting for firefox to learn how to msi and make extension management happen for the enterprise; the IE option is very nice for enterprise use in legacy environments.

Google's apparent willingness to support depreciated content worries me greatly. I'm left wondering whether this was a marketing ploy to make IE-depended businesses switch over to better-maintained software. And if so, isn't this going against Google's de facto policy of progressive drive? Allowing for browser-specific legacy code feels like a step back from the future and down towards stagnation.

On one hand, this scenario would not be a bad thing for the immediate pursuit of convenience. On the other, I'm left wary of the broad picture. Please don't hurt the web.

The reason is because those legacy app are most likely never gonna be rewritten any day soon and Google want a foothold in the enterprise market, so basically they are doing that by letting business still use their legacy web app while having a modern browser for everything else. And they are not allowing a browser legacy code in chrome, it basically just allowing it load a legacy browser for the legacy app.

Still the biggest take away from this is not running a legacy browser, but being able to manage all your chrome users from the Google Apps control panel. Being able to pre-deploy chrome apps, bulk purchase apps, and set administratively defined policies is huge... And to be able to do this on an OU level is simply awesome.

This would be awesome if it were something we could install locally and not require our users to sign in to Chrome to leverage it. It would be better off as a standalone product that tied into AD. While we (currently) let users sign into Chrome, that may not remain the case due to security concerns.

The Legacy Browser part is very attractive because we've got a number of vendors who's products/sites still insist on using ActiveX controls, which makes them unusable in Chrome or Firefox.

The Legacy Browser Support does not require you to be logged in. I've deployed it to some test generic accounts that do not login to Chrome which work fine.

These are some of the undocumented tips I've discovered while playing with the policies:

The extension has no Windows 8 support (yet)The extension has no options to configure on the client side, everything is managed through GPOThe extension installs a Chrome plugin so make sure you whitelist it if you manage pluginsThe Group Policy settings for LBS are all located under Computer Configuration

It works flawlessly with all versions of IE so far as advertised. I'm loving it as this means I won't have to make custom shortcuts for users in the future!

Google's apparent willingness to support depreciated content worries me greatly. I'm left wondering whether this was a marketing ploy to make IE-depended businesses switch over to better-maintained software. And if so, isn't this going against Google's de facto policy of progressive drive? Allowing for browser-specific legacy code feels like a step back from the future and down towards stagnation.

On one hand, this scenario would not be a bad thing for the immediate pursuit of convenience. On the other, I'm left wary of the broad picture. Please don't hurt the web.

The reason is because those legacy app are most likely never gonna be rewritten any day soon and Google want a foothold in the enterprise market, so basically they are doing that by letting business still use their legacy web app while having a modern browser for everything else. And they are not allowing a browser legacy code in chrome, it basically just allowing it load a legacy browser for the legacy app.

Kind of ultimately defeats the purpose of any real security then doesn't it ?

What businesses are forcing their Employees to use a single Browser on a single platform anyway ?

Everywhere I've worked in the past 15 years have had Macs - Wins and Linux systems for different aspects and different Employees. All of which asked me what Computer/ OS and Software I would need to perform my tasks. None of which forced anyone to a given Browser. If I'm on a Mac running Safari at my job - this all becomes pointless. Not to mention that this is a Windows / Chrome OS ONLY Item - which is not mentioned in the article. (aside from the digging and hinting mid article referring to IE legacy access).

Still the biggest take away from this is not running a legacy browser, but being able to manage all your chrome users from the Google Apps control panel. Being able to pre-deploy chrome apps, bulk purchase apps, and set administratively defined policies is huge... And to be able to do this on an OU level is simply awesome.

The other flaw with this - is are these businesses allotting some sort of Google Account login specifically for the business ? Because I am sure as hell not logging into soemthing like this form my personal Account.

Seems like there is some information for the larger picture missing in this article that should be elaborated on a bit more. And as usual ARS does not directly point to the content they discuss. A link out to the topic at hand would be nice.

Google's apparent willingness to support depreciated content worries me greatly. I'm left wondering whether this was a marketing ploy to make IE-depended businesses switch over to better-maintained software. And if so, isn't this going against Google's de facto policy of progressive drive? Allowing for browser-specific legacy code feels like a step back from the future and down towards stagnation.

On one hand, this scenario would not be a bad thing for the immediate pursuit of convenience. On the other, I'm left wary of the broad picture. Please don't hurt the web.

The reason is because those legacy app are most likely never gonna be rewritten any day soon and Google want a foothold in the enterprise market, so basically they are doing that by letting business still use their legacy web app while having a modern browser for everything else. And they are not allowing a browser legacy code in chrome, it basically just allowing it load a legacy browser for the legacy app.

Kind of ultimately defeats the purpose of any real security then doesn't it ?

What businesses are forcing their Employees to use a single Browser on a single platform anyway ?

Everywhere I've worked in the past 15 years have had Macs - Wins and Linux systems for different aspects and different Employees. All of which asked me what Computer/ OS and Software I would need to perform my tasks. None of which forced anyone to a given Browser. If I'm on a Mac running Safari at my job - this all becomes pointless. Not to mention that this is a Windows / Chrome OS ONLY Item - which is not mentioned in the article. (aside from the digging and hinting mid article referring to IE legacy access).

Still the biggest take away from this is not running a legacy browser, but being able to manage all your chrome users from the Google Apps control panel. Being able to pre-deploy chrome apps, bulk purchase apps, and set administratively defined policies is huge... And to be able to do this on an OU level is simply awesome.

The other flaw with this - is are these businesses allotting some sort of Google Account login specifically for the business ? Because I am sure as hell not logging into soemthing like this form my personal Account.

Seems like there is some information for the larger picture missing in this article that should be elaborated on a bit more. And as usual ARS does not directly point to the content they discuss. A link out to the topic at hand would be nice.

Its called Google Apps. If your company already has Google Apps, they can already leverage this, and across platforms...